Slashdot Mirror
White House Releases Sensitive Personal Info From Voters Concerned About Privacy (vox.com)
Huge_UID shares an article from Vox:
The White House just responded to concerns it would release voters' sensitive personal information by releasing a bunch of voters' sensitive personal information. Last month, the White House's "election integrity" commission sent out requests to every state asking for all voters' names, party IDs, addresses, and even the last four digits of their Social Security numbers, among other information. The White House then said this information would be made available to the public. A lot of people did not like the idea, fearing that their personal information could be made public. So some sent emails to the White House, demanding that it rescind the request. This week, the White House decided to make those emails from concerned citizens public through the commission's new website... It didn't censor any of the personal information -- such as names, email addresses, actual addresses, and phone numbers -- included in those emails.
Some of the emails also included the commenter's place of employment -- though at least one commenter helpfully informed the White House that their voter info was available at Goatse. But the voting comission is now also facing new lawsuits from the ACLU, Public Citizen, and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, McClatchy reported on Monday, noting that "Trump's voting commission has told states to hold off on sharing the data until after a judge's ruling in a lawsuit."
Some of the emails also included the commenter's place of employment -- though at least one commenter helpfully informed the White House that their voter info was available at Goatse. But the voting comission is now also facing new lawsuits from the ACLU, Public Citizen, and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, McClatchy reported on Monday, noting that "Trump's voting commission has told states to hold off on sharing the data until after a judge's ruling in a lawsuit."
..to not give a fuck about your privacy.
And, does it really makes any difference?
Well, it did happen. Calling things you don't like "bullshit" or "fake news" doesn't magically make them go away.
Oh Bartles, you still believe there were 30 million illegals voting, don't you?
Tell you what, why don't you march into Bannon's office and tell him to stop crapping up the joint? Even COBRA did better job at world domination.
This. I live in Seattle, and my vote hasn't counted a single time since we switched to voting by mail. I was hoping Trump would expose the massive fraud here.
One of the pieces of information that the Trump administration is demanding from the states is how voters voted. They want to know if you voted for Trump or one of his opponents.
Let that sink in for a second. Imaging the Slashdot comments section if a President Clinton or President Obama demanded this same information from the states. Remember, the Constitution gives the power over all US elections to the states.
You are welcome on my lawn.
One of the pieces of data requested for every voter is party affiliation: https://www.theguardian.com/us...
I'll let you do the math.
Sure let's hear what you have to say. What did you say? You don't want people to have access to your private personal information? Let's see here... okay so we'll go ahead and just release some of that publicly for you. Don't complain. We haven't released EVERYTHING on you, just yet...
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
When I got my latest voter registration card, the county agent seemed to be pretty careful about checking my residency info, but I don't think she got my SSN. Of course, the state has my SSN and other info, and they _could_ put it together and publish it if they wanted. I don't think they would, but... so what?! My SSN is just a number. And as I will answer below, my party "affiliation" is fodder for the genuinely stupid. I did NOT vote for "my" party candidate.
A dingo ate my sig...
...for people to start throwing molotov cocktails at Trump's properties. Seriously, I think stuff like that is just around the corner.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
I am not "new" by an means. But to feed your story, the answers are "hunt" and 6443. Have fun with that.
A dingo ate my sig...
Is there a specific factual issue with the summary you object to?
Exactly that.
"If you want my personal information, you can go look at Goatse"
Direct link to messages, yes they are almost all childish it seems.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/docs/comments-received-june-29-through-july-11-2017.pdf
Perhaps the Republicana should.look at the current t office holder for the source of most of their problems. Of late they could also look at the idiot eldest son of his
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I remember when, not so long ago, people were making fun of presidents and other politicians for being technologically illiterate, and perhaps not even knowing what a “mouse” was. Well, I have to give it to the current administration. Not only are they masters of the technology (databases, social media, etc.), they’ve now officially embraced one of the latest social trends: doxing!
The times, they are a-changing...
but kudos for the media for following their agenda.
This. Influencing the narrative is the entire reason the media exists.
I would not really call people who use violence to intimidate others people. They are something less.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
WTF is wrong with your government? That sort of shit would bring down a government in any sane first-world democracy.
True freedom.
Two of the items on the demand list from the voter fraud "commission" are 1) party affiliation, and 2) voting record. The possibility of deanonymization of votes in several states has already been proven. In fact, there are data brokers selling personal information of conservative voters. For more information about this, I suggest checking EFF's site. This has been an issue of theirs for a while.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Do you not know how email campaigns work? Oh course they need to have people's names on them so they can demonstrate they didn't just randomly generate a bunch of emails. I don't think you thought that through.
Have you ever used one of those types of sites? Generally you subscribe to a mailing list about issues you're interested in, you get random emails about such issues with a link to send a letter to your representative (how many people bother to keep track of their government's contact info?), click on the link and you get a form with your contact info and a letter already written out. You can edit the content or send it as is. Most people are too lazy to edit so they send it as is.
We can't have an intellectual discussion because you won't see what is painfully obvious to the rest of us: Trump is an unmitigated dumpster fire, who will do serious damage to this nation at best, and will set us back 100 years or more at worst.
When Kobach was Kansas Secretary of State, he made ferreting out voter fraud a centerpiece of his administration and conducted a two-year investigation. He found nine cases, mostly older Republicans.
http://www.politico.com/magazi...
There is no wide scale voter fraud. It doesn't exist.
https://www.brennancenter.org/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
"Voting record" simply means if you voted or not. It is a highly important data to determine if there is fraudulent voting going on. For instance the same person might be registered in two states. If the "voting record" for one state showed they voted in 8 of the last 10 elections, but not the last 2, and the "voting record" for the other state showed they only voted in the last 2 elections, that is a probable case of them moving and the registration for the first state not being purged. If they voted in the last 2 elections in BOTH states, then that is a sign they maintained their registration in one or the other states illegally.
"with strong efforts to ensure that jobs staid in country" You're a fucking idiot.
It is supposed to be "White House Releases Sensitive Personal Info ______Of______ Voters Concerned About Privacy". Just because you are linking to an article which has a grammatical error in the title, doesn't mean you should keep the error. That is, unless the post itself is about the error.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Could you cite what study you are talking about?
Nope. With SSN (and name to match) with mother's maiden name, you can bypass or reset lots of passwords for banks, get new credit cards, and other things.
DOB and SSN would let you add/drop classes on the phone system at college. DOB + SSN (name not even needed), and you could waste thousands of dollars of someone's money. Or cause them to fail out of college, dropping the classes they are in, enroll them in ones they don't know about, for solid F's for the year.
Learn to love Alaska
Can you cite any proof of wide scale voter fraud?
I've only read about four documented cases of vote fraud in 2016.
https://www.dailykos.com/stori...
Phonebook is voluntary... this was not.
If you can't see the difference, then I fear there's no hope left for you.
Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes (June 19, 2017)
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
re noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
we're not "suffering" under Obama anymore.
Hard? He's been in office for half a year and already made Bush look like Churchill.
Besides your batshit crazy conspiracy theories, what exactly is your point? Obama did it as well so Trump doing it is just peachy?
Sigh. Telling me to go and read something is not very helpful. What specific detail are you objecting to?
From the link:
"The research organization Just Facts, a widely cited, independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians, revealed its number-crunching in a report on national immigration."
Did any of you realize that Vox left out a little detail and actively deceived the readers? For those who live under rock, the data they received and reposted is public data and searchable by any goon with a computer and keyboard by nearly every state website. Some states allow the public release of the last four of your social. So it is okay for your state to vomit this information, yet when the federal government, who already spies on every fucking communication made by phone and computer, releases it, it becomes a privacy matter. We civil libertarians have been bitching about this for almost two decades. Where the hell have you all been? Oh that's right. This is a partisan issue drummed up by the media and now you all care. If anything, the Trump administration just made you all aware of something that has been going on for a long time. Welcome to the fight people. Now it is time to put your individual states back in check.
What occurs in a story about direct publishing of names and other actual personal info?
Deflection, and every attempt to change the subject you can imagine. This is an interesting trend we have here. The amount of deflection is ramped up with the provable veracity of the story. This is not consistent with the meme of the intrepid and privacy focused Slashdot user. It is consistent with some other online trends.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
There is no other way to put this: This is an ASSHOLE move by an ASSHOLE 'administration' being led by an ASSHOLE 'President' who continually demonstrates through actions that they don't give a flying FUCK about the average citizen, they only care about their agendas and their corporate and 1%-er cronies. Finding that they've been in bed with Russia the whole time and throwing the entire administration out on their ear can't come soon enough. 2020 elections can't come soon enough. How are you Trump-supporting idiots liking him and his minions now? You all like your privacy AT LEAST AS MUCH AS I DO, and they just took a BIG STEAMING DUMP all over the entire CONCEPT of your privacy, HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL?
has been covering voting shenanigans since 2000. He spoke to WMNF(.org) news on 6 July about his investigation into this farce of an integrity project. His website.
"To stop the terrorists."
From the link:
Its investigation found that Virginia removed more than 5,500 noncitizens from voter lists, including 1,852 people who had cast more than 7,000 ballots. The people volunteered their status, most likely when acquiring driver’s licenses. The Public Interest Legal Foundation said there are likely many more illegal voters on Virginia’s rolls who have never admitted to being noncitizens.
Perhaps scrubbing the voter rolls would be a good thing...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Four states have mandatory absentee/vote-by-mail: California (starting in 2018), Colorado, Washington and Oregon. What do those States also have in common? They vote Democrat (the last 3, overwhelmingly so). It would seem, therefore, if Democrats were really interested in fair and honest elections they would cheer for regular voting registration reviews and voter roll purges, so their easier-to-commit-fraud elections would be fair and above reproach. Yet the opposite happens... Why is that?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
"The Public Interest Legal Foundation said there are likely many more ..."
Why should we consider the numbers from an 'investigation' of a group of conservative lawyers seriously, lawyers who make it their job, and are payed, to promote the idea of voter fraud.
https://publicinterestlegal.or...
Uh, the State removed 5500 NONCITIZEN registered voters, and at least 1,852 of those ILLEGAL VOTERS actually cast ballots. You keep trying to pitch this as a "right wing nut jobs" kind of thing, but this is hard, factual actions taken by States. Actual REAL illegal votes cast (7,000 in Virginia alone). Documented. Get off the "conservative nut job" talking points. Non-citizen voting is a real thing. Or do you want to disenfranchise your fellow citizens? Do you want it to be "it's not the votes that count, but who counts the vote"?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
It wasnt that they were publishing voter information, they posted the emails that they received over the concerns about the collection of it. It even stated right on the website: "Any member of the public wishing to submit written comments for the Commission’s consideration may do so via email at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov. Please note that the Commission may post such written comments publicly on our website, including names and contact information that are submitted." So DUH....People never read and just react. This story is just more BS.
To me is looks as if this story has dragged in a bunch of astroturfers.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Bush looks like Churchill who 'invaded' the Dardanelles.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The only time they care is if it's not going to a correct target.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
The page you linked is concerning the 2008 election not the 2016 election. What proof or scientifically defensibly study do you have about 2016?
The underlying study by Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha and David C. Earnest found only five non-citizens self reported as voting in 2008 that they could verify out of a study sample size of 32,800 people.
If you are interested in reading the actual 2014 study concerning the 2008 election based on polling 32,800 people in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010 here is a link:
https://ww2.odu.edu/~jrichman/...
Here is a link to the lead author, Jesse Richman, of that study saying that the washingtontimes.com article is deceptive if anyone believes it's concerning 2016.
https://fs.wp.odu.edu/jrichman/2017/01/27/i-do-not-support-the-washington-times-piece/
If you read the article, you would have seen that a mistake was made in the website. It was not a malicious act. Yet, you and other posters act like this is some vast conspiracy against privacy.
Not exactly a malicious act, instead it's a mix of incompetency and a complete lack of concern about things like privacy.
When you take a incompetent people, and give them a checklist of rules they don't care about, they're going to violate those rules. That's why the Trump administration keeps having scandals.
The otter convient fact is that the voter roles are being looked into because there are wide scale voter fraud.
Just how many fraudulent voters do you think the left has? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions?
Don't you find it interesting that the left can apparently organize a small army of illegal voters and no one comes forward to spill the beans? Seriously, can you find a single reputable person who claims to be part of this massive fraud effort?
Meanwhile, Trump can't organize a meeting with a half-dozen people without it leaking to the press.
I stole this Sig
Funny, you took the time to call names, but not defend your argument. The facts say that is has been in office for about half a year and has had several policy successes. His failures have include:
Having an immigration policy stopped by a Hawaii judge who did not ground his ruling in the constitution. We know this to be the case because the supreme court overturned it unanimously.
Being embroiled in an investigation for collusion with Russia. Most of the charges have been disproven, and there are several stories indicating this. There are also tapes of various DNC operatives admitting in what they thought were undocumented comments, that they are doing this for ratings and to discredit. They admit, there is nothing there. The new story of Trumps son meeting with the Russians looking for dirt is true. However, there is no evidence of quid pro quo. However, as the issues are being looked into, it does turn out that the Clinton campaign also used foreign sources, at times WITH quid pro quo. I will go out on a limb that you either do not know this or are so addled in your thinking that you fail to see your personal bias leading to ignorance.
So, there really is not a dumpster fire say as you say. You could not rationally make the argument because in reality it is not true, outside your imagination and that of other people who have gone insane with hatred. Be better.
So Again, why is this modded up?
Hear that? That was the sound of your ass being kicked.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
What exactly did he do that you think was bad? Not your imagination. Facts please.
You do understand that merely disagreeing with you is not fact. What was the policy he made that you disagree with and what was the outcome that was negative. For example, you would not accept an argument where I say you are completely wrong, just because I said so.
Try to grow up some and look at the world analytically instead of the childish mindset everything donkey good everything elephant bad.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Phantom, glad to see that you are following me! I must be having a good impact on your life.
Since you do not read a good deal, let me help put your post in the correct context. You are missing key insights into the situation that can only be gained by gathering information from a wide range of sources and taking the time to understand things.
When Bush entered office, he had a policy of reducing U.S. disengagement. In his first year or so as president, he has begun to pull back from external nations and reduce what he deemed the excessive use of force used by the previous administration. He was very much opposed to nation building. Tragically, history altered his thinking to make him one of the greatest nation building presidents.
On September 11th, a great tragedy occurred. Thousands of people lost their lives and even first responders were targeted while trying to save them. The nation was in shock, and it was pissed. They wanted blood. They wanted revenge. There were calls to nuke the Muslims back into the stone age. It would have been very easy to give it. It would have been the popular thing to do.
Then, a remarkable thing happened. The dogs of war were chained by Bush. Instead of plunging us into a war of extermination, he did the unpopular thing and held off until all the forensic evidence was gathered. Instead of broadly targeting Muslims, he tried to find out the exact offshoots that were responsible and targeted them. This took 30 days. To you, it may seem meaningless, but the in the mood of the country at the time, this was nearly unforgivable.
When operation enduring freedom started, it was swift, surgical and brutally effective. Bush has taken time to try to separate out those who wanted us dead and those of a different fate. He began a program to feed and educate poor Aghanies at the same time the attacks were taking place. He wanted to show that America was a place where we would meet our foes with justice, but show compassion to the downtrodden. It was one of the greatest moments of restraint in history. He turned a bloodbath into a surgical strike of hopeful liberation. I would argue for this, he should have gotten a Nobel Peace prize. Instead, the next president, who gave the world widespread assassination by robot drone, got one for being black. The world has no lack of irony. I digress.
You may not believe all this, but it was well documented in a book. The book was not written by some right when demagogue as you fear, but by the left leaning Bob Woodward. Woodward was one of journalists who found the corruption in the Nixon whitehouse and bravely pursued it, ultimately bringing down a president. Before 9/11, he was doing a piece to try to understand this presidency better after a bitter campaign that was still contested in many people's mind. After the dark day, he was given near full access to the west wing, so that he could chronicle the decisions and thoughts that went into the response. Bush believed that it was important in a democracy for people to understand why their leaders did what they did, so he offered transparency. Again, it would have been easy to go the other way.
https://www.amazon.com/Bush-at...
If you can get the time and tear yourself away from youtube long enough, it is an excellent read. It is not always flattering to the Bush administration. It shows good points and bad.
I understand you were also including the Iraq war in your "pithy" comment. But to understand the full tragedy of that war, you have to take the time to understand the events leading up to it, and the decision making processes of those involved. Until you do, you opinions on the matter are likely corrupted by childish blog posts and hit pieces designed to denigrate a president of the opposition party. Read the book, and I would love to discuss with you more. The question is, can you leave your bubble?
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Two points:
1) Whether the Afghanistan war was necessary or not (and there's an argument to be made for it), the execution of the war was poorly done. The day after 9/11, every country in the world was on the side of America. A month later, Bush had managed to turn them all against America. This is poor diplomacy at the least. Furthermore if he'd focused more on that war, it would have been done much more quickly. Instead he got distracted by Iraq.
2) It was obvious he wanted to invade Iraq before he even got elected. If you watch the debates with Gore you will see this, and if you look at the writings of the people he brought in as his advisors you will this. He wanted to invade Iraq before going into office.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Interesting comments, but modding yourself up is really trashy. No one else is reading an old thread.
1. It is not obvious he wanted to invade Iraq before the war. I do not think there is much evidence before that, except for some very ignorant people saying he was a son trying to finish daddies work.
2.Your recollection of what happened in the Afghanistan war is amazingly faulty. It was a stunning success by all accounts. The country had proven a quagmire of the Soviets, and had fallen with days. You really need to read more and widely. Try not to stay always on anti-bush/conservative web sites.
3. What you call poor diplomacy did not happen until the Iraq ware. You are getting things confused again. It was positive for the first war.
4. Again, you have so many things and timelines wrong in your head. You really need to take a deep breath, forget what you think you know, and go back and read. At least, look at the Woodward book. Until then, you are really not worth talking too. You have too great of ignorance of events mixed with such a narrow minded hatred. You are unable to see the nuances of the world. In order to truly understand things, you need to be able to appreciate the complexity of events. Something you will not get by examining only narrow sources and perspectives.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Fair enough: you're fine with party affiliation being public data.
Can't have it both ways.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
1. It is not obvious he wanted to invade Iraq before the war.
It wasn't obvious to YOU. The people who he hired clearly wanted to invade Iraq.
2.Your recollection of what happened in the Afghanistan war is amazingly faulty. It was a stunning success by all accounts.
Seriously..........you wish it was a success and so you twist your vision until it matches your dream.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The broader comment is all that information is out there, has been out there, and was also abused heavily during the Obama era. Maybe you are different, but for many on these forums they uttered not a peep then, because their team was in power. Now that another team is in power, they are acting like the end of the world.
Credibility comes from consistency in positions. There is not a lot of that in slashdot anymore. I wonder if you have been consistent...
Also, government listing information on purpose is not something to be stood for. Government screwing up (as it actually said in the article if you bothered to read) and posting information, is not good, but it is not the end of things either.
So, I have to ask, when a similar screw-up occurred with the medical data bases with the affordable care act, did you come out strongly about that too? Or are so lost as a human being you actually think one side is all good and the other is all evil? If so, there is no hope left for you....
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Again, you are giving your opinion, colored by the bubble you live in after the fact. You still have not gone back and read more about the matter, which shows that you are both ignorant and lazy. This is a sad combination in a human being.
I offered sources for you to read that are well researched to clarify the matter. You are offering only your opinion, not well researched or thought out. This makes me ask. Are you a millennial?
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Are you going to deny that he brought in advisors who advocated invading Iraq before he ever became president? You sad sack of factlessness.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Here is an example of admitted voter fraud.
https://www.realclearpolitics....!
The question comes down to this. Do you think democrats are all purely good people who never do wrong or are they like most human things, flawed in several ways?
You seem very rational and methodical in your thinking. If you stop to analyze it some, you will catch that you probably have been showing some internal bias where you do not seek out wrong for one party, while assuming the other party is always wrong. Start asking yourself about the sources that you read and how trustable are they. Do you think a source made up of 90% or more from one party will give you a balanced view? If so, you do not believe in the fundamental idea of diversity and why it is important. Groups are very bad at being self analytical.
The republican party is not terribly good. However, neither is the democrat party. The only way they improve is when people inside them realize this and try to change it.
Lately, zealousness has infected the democrat party. Members are willing to forgive all sorts of wrong doing on their side, just to get the other side. Ask yourself, why does the democrat party oppose any attempt to ensure the voter rolls are honest? Ask yourself that deeply, if you can.
The publishing of the voter information was not good. However, were you so up in arms calling the Obama administration did similar things when setting up the data base for the people using the affordable care act? Did you call him incompetent? If not, your rage is false. You just want to hunt the other guy, not fix the system.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
So far, still your opinion, no facts or references. My what a small bubble you have.
I am always interested in learning something new. The reason you lean far left is because you are not.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
btw the reason I get 'modded up' is because I have good karma. No one is coming being after to say they agree with me, you shouldn't take that as a vote in favor or against. Rummie himself signed this.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
You seem to be conflating two issues together.
The primary focus here is that missives expressing privacy concerns (i.e., NOT the voting records) were reproduced, in full, including contact information, on the White House website. It was voluntary to send the message, but there was no expectation that these would be released online in the fashion they were.
The other one you are referring to (Trump's demands for voter information), is a different case altogether. But... you are tying together voting with the act of getting your voting preferences released and scruitinsed by others. The big question you need to ask yourself is: was this what the voters were expecting to have happen? If not, then the request by Trump is inappropriate, and this is nothing like a phonebook, as one party is surprised by who has access to their details.
Please, apply your critical thinking skills to that and see what you come up with...
I can address your first (and repeated) point upfront: I have no "team" as far as politics are concerned. Like you, I'm also concerned by the rather two-faced nature of Obama's presidency (hello Patriot Act!), and in no way believe the leaks and reductions in civil liberties under his reign are somehow excused due to his party affiliation.
Now, the bit I'm unsure about (perhaps I've mis-read your original quip incorrectly) is exactly what position you're advocating. You seemed to be decrying the hysteria, when in reality, it sounds like we both agree that this action was not acceptable, and what you are decrying is hypocrisy.
In this particular instance, in the best case, it was a government screw-up, in a fairly ironic fashion, that serves to demonstrate that the government is not fit to handle the voting data it's requesting. After all, they've just proven they're fundamentally incapable of properly protecting the privacy of said data.
In the worst case, the government has taken punitive action against individuals who clearly value their privacy enough to write emails. Now, I don't believe this is the case, but... it's still a possibility.
I agree we shouldn't let Obama get away with being treated like an angel, but are you actually advocating that has any impact on whether this should be ignored or not? I'd suggest that the most balanced view ought to treat these events with equal concern, as a symptom of the underlying rot at present within politics and the government. This is not the end of things... but it's certainly not a step in a direction the government ought to take. And it's certainly not behaviour we ought to be excusing.
There it is. We follow this long path to find, as expected, it ends in a basement blog. Information Clearing house is not exactly what many call a credible source. IN fact, Harvard goes out of its way to list it as an unreliable new source.
http://guides.library.harvard....
So, understandably you have the opinions you do because of your sources. They are both limited and conspiratorial.
The memo is interesting. Maybe it's real, maybe its not. Sourcing does matter, and with Bush era stuff, it is especially hard since there was so much character assassination going on. Bush was by no means a great president, but he was also not the cartoon villain that the popular media painted him to be. Much like Obama was not the anti-christ that some right wing sources claimed, but his administration was very far from the saintly image the leftish press portrayed. In both cases and i would argue today as well, blatant mischaracterizations diluted honest policy discussions. The losers of this whole thing are the average people.
If the memo is real, this is what makes the study of the pathway to war interesting. As you look into it more, there were many viewpoints and forces advocating many things. By all accounts, Rumsfeld was a warhawk. So, this fits within the narrative. However, not everyone inside the administration was. Like most of life, it is pretty nuanced.
When you look at many sources, the bulk of administration started toward peace and a more isolationist stance. After September 11th, the pro-war end of the administration won out. This is what makes the various conspiracy theories about 9/11 so intriguing. Without the twin towers falling, it was going to be a much more peaceful world.
What is really interesting to ask is, as President, what would you have done? Keep in mind that the arguments (not necessarily the conclusions) of the Rumsfeld memo you linked are essentially true. The policies dealing with Iraq in the Clinton era were not working terribly well either, so the status quo was not a real solution.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
If I mischaracterized your view, for this I am sorry.
Essentially, we agree on most points. Both things can be true at the same time. It is not good of the government to leak the information, and it should not be excused. It is also true it was not a malicious hunt to destroy people.
Your point on if this should be ignored is interesting. I guess the next question would be what would you suggest doing? Ignoring it and pretending it did not happen seems silly. I guess I would say note it happened, fix the link, and possibly fire the guy who screwed up. I would also say that drumbeat of hysteria to demonize Trump is not terribly productive or even honest. I am actually interested. What do you think should be done?
The other problem is how would you fix the election fraud problems? These problems do exist. To me, anyone interested in a fair election would want to make sure the system was not rigged. I am very suspicious toward those who oppose every measure to ensure honesty, while offering no solutions of their own. This seems to smell of people gaming the system protecting what benefits them.
For example, I live in Texas. There is a problem with illegal alien voting. Even if you feel that they live here and should have a vote, the current law says otherwise. There was also some evidence of people voting under other people's identity. To correct this, a law was passed requiring an ID to vote. Please keep in mind that you need an ID to by alcohol, open a bank account, get cable tv, whatever. To function at all in society, you have to have a driver's license/ID. Yet, this was opposed by the local democrat party-- even after a provision was made to pay for an ID for the very poor who could not afford one. This is not a perfect fix, but it would clean up the voter rolls some. There really is no reason to block this save.....you are benefiting from dirty voter rolls.
I tell you that long boring story to say this. I suspect that we would both agree that giving the government too much information and power is not a brilliant idea. However, rejecting all solutions to this problem is not acceptable either.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
The memo is real, it was listed on PNAC's website for a long time. You're dumb as a brick. Instead of trying to figure out if it's real or not (you know, by using Google) you merely attack it. You attack it because you disagree with it.
It's not that you're dumb, you don't know how to collect information.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Here is an example of admitted voter fraud.
https://www.realclearpolitics....!
Your source is a video by a group notorious for videos that are dishonestly edited and where they goaded people into making incriminating sounding statements?
Are you going to follow that up with a recommendation to invest with Bernie Madoff?
The question comes down to this. Do you think democrats are all purely good people who never do wrong or are they like most human things, flawed in several ways?
Of course they are.
You seem very rational and methodical in your thinking. If you stop to analyze it some, you will catch that you probably have been showing some internal bias where you do not seek out wrong for one party, while assuming the other party is always wrong. Start asking yourself about the sources that you read and how trustable are they. Do you think a source made up of 90% or more from one party will give you a balanced view? If so, you do not believe in the fundamental idea of diversity and why it is important. Groups are very bad at being self analytical.
Let me throw that back at you.
How many people voted in the last election?
How many fraudulent voters would it take to affect the election?
How many people do you think fraudulently voted?
How much would a news organization pay to someone who could give convincing proof of this, such as an illegal immigrant with a hidden iPhone filming themselves while a DNC operative helps them commit voter fraud?
Where are all these people?
The mass voter fraud theory collapses when subjected to minimal scrutiny.
Lately, zealousness has infected the democrat party. Members are willing to forgive all sorts of wrong doing on their side, just to get the other side. Ask yourself, why does the democrat party oppose any attempt to ensure the voter rolls are honest? Ask yourself that deeply, if you can.
Because there is absolutely zero evidence that wide-scale voter fraud exists, and voters who are inhibited by an "attempt to ensure the voter rolls are honest" are disproportionately Democratic.
If the GOP was really concerned about voter fraud they'd fight mail-in ballots where there is a real (but hard to measure) fraud problem. But that screws Republican so they don't care.
I stole this Sig
This is NOT the USA where I agreed to be a citizen!!!
The ONLY purpose this serves is to corporations and covert billionaire/millionaire operations!
There is NO need for this info to be freely public.
And the fucking stupid politicians in office wonder why there are terrorist organizations, and revolutionary revolts!
What makes this an okay thing, yet Trump is getting away with hiding his private info?!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
What ACTUALLY apparently happened is that COMMENT emails were published, NOT the info from individual voters.
Further, the replies to said requests for State's voters' info were that only info that is already public would be submitted.
Any SSN or month and day of birth are NOT to be released.
Yet, your full name, birth year, and voter party and status (not who you voted-for) are included.
Still further, most, if not all, states are awaiting a decision by a judge before releasing anything.
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
Reality is calling. It says it misses you. Please come back to it.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.